Posted: 2/25/2010 6:20:14 AM EDT
| I have a friend who was recently “disarmed” by the local PD due to an accidental discharge in his condo. Now my problem is that he was holding my NFA upper for me until I receive my stamp… What are my chances of getting my upper back? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did they take the upper? If so, why? It's not a firearm. It's firearm related. Probably took his ammo too. OP: Cantact the responding department and explain the situation. They took YOUR property, not his. - my $.02 Holy shit. Did they take his holsters and MOLLE gear, too? By what legal doctorine do they take "non-firearms?" |
|
Here in MA, a negligent discharge can result in the loss of your LTC if your Chief feels you are an "Unsuitable Person".
It happened to an LEO in Turners Falls, MA. He was cleaning his Glock after his annual qualification day, didn't clear the chamber, and touched a round off into the floor. When his neighbor in the downstairs apartment came up to check on him, he told him to go back downstairs and that it was OK since he was a cop. His neighbor called the PD, since the LEO didn't have any concern about his neighbors and check on them (the .40 SXT went into the floor and knocked plaster off the ceiling of the nursery downstairs where their baby was sleeping). The LEO had his LTC revoked by his Chief as an "Unsuitable Person" and he lost his job on the PD. But, there's a dual standard. In MA, if the PD is called for a negligent discharge, you will probably lose your LTC for life, just like you do for even 1st offense OUI. But, if you are an LEO, probably not, with the exception of the case above. As another extreme example, a training officer was driving the cruiser with his rookie in the passenger seat. After attempting a traffic stop, which resulted in a short pursuit, the car stopped and the two officers initiated a felony stop. They drew their Glocks, and while grasping the door handle with his left hand, the training officer experienced involuntary muscle constriction, and since he put his finger where it shouldn't have been (and had his muzzle pointed where it shouldn't have been), he shot his rookie in the leg. Both the training officer and his Chief blamed the "accident" on the unsafe design of the Glock since it doesn't have an external safety. The training officer was not discliplined, let alone lose his LTC. So, I can't say I'm surprised about what happened to your friend. I'd try to explain the issue with the PD, and have someone else who doens't have an AR lower hold your upper, as the above poster recommended. |
|
What authority did the police seize this property on?
An AD/ND is just that. That can be prosecuted depending on specific or more general local laws. If someone gets hurt, then it is all on your hands. That is part of the responsibility of being a gun owner. This is an action that may cause you to lose your CCW permit pending a review with the state board. But if he is not a mental case or in danger of hurting his wife/gf, then there is no precedent for seizure! If no one is hurt, then you should be prosecuted for breaking whatever local "unsafe discharge" law there is and that is it! This is just sad.  I'm not justifying this and I understand that it can easily kill you or others, but one AD/ND should not result in losing your 2nd amendment rights AND property rights immediately. If the police think you should not have your guns after the AD/ND, get a judge to sign for the seizure.
I never have had one, hopefully never will, and do everything to prevent it, but AD/ND DOES happen. I know people will jump down my throat for this, but seriously people, would you be o.k. giving up your guns all at once right after an AD/ND and the cops show up??? I think there would be a lot of "but I was only........I'm a different case because.............." type excuses coming out all of a sudden. And don't say "well it wouldn't happen to me" Because it can! |
|
Quoted:
What authority did the police seize this property on? An AD/ND is just that. That can be prosecuted depending on specific or more general local laws. If someone gets hurt, then it is all on your hands. That is part of the responsibility of being a gun owner. This is an action that may cause you to lose your CCW permit pending a review with the state board. But if he is not a mental case or in danger of hurting his wife/gf, then there is no precedent for seizure! If no one is hurt, then you should be prosecuted for breaking whatever local "unsafe discharge" law there is and that is it! This is just sad. I'm not justifying this and I understand that it can easily kill you or others, but one AD/ND should not result in losing your 2nd amendment rights AND property rights immediately. If the police think you should not have your guns after the AD/ND, get a judge to sign for the seizure.
I never have had one, hopefully never will, and do everything to prevent it, but AD/ND DOES happen. I know people will jump down my throat for this, but seriously people, would you be o.k. giving up your guns all at once right after an AD/ND and the cops show up??? I think there would be a lot of "but I was only........I'm a different case because.............." type excuses coming out all of a sudden. And don't say "well it wouldn't happen to me" Because it can! I'm not arguing about their ability to take your guns in the event of an ND. I'm questioning their right to take thing that are not guns nor subject to control, like the upper in the OP. I mean, really, where does it end? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
What authority did the police seize this property on? An AD/ND is just that. That can be prosecuted depending on specific or more general local laws. If someone gets hurt, then it is all on your hands. That is part of the responsibility of being a gun owner. This is an action that may cause you to lose your CCW permit pending a review with the state board. But if he is not a mental case or in danger of hurting his wife/gf, then there is no precedent for seizure! If no one is hurt, then you should be prosecuted for breaking whatever local "unsafe discharge" law there is and that is it! This is just sad. I'm not justifying this and I understand that it can easily kill you or others, but one AD/ND should not result in losing your 2nd amendment rights AND property rights immediately. If the police think you should not have your guns after the AD/ND, get a judge to sign for the seizure.
I never have had one, hopefully never will, and do everything to prevent it, but AD/ND DOES happen. I know people will jump down my throat for this, but seriously people, would you be o.k. giving up your guns all at once right after an AD/ND and the cops show up??? I think there would be a lot of "but I was only........I'm a different case because.............." type excuses coming out all of a sudden. And don't say "well it wouldn't happen to me" Because it can! I'm not arguing about their ability to take your guns in the event of an ND. I'm questioning their right to take thing that are not guns nor subject to control, like the upper in the OP. I mean, really, where does it end? There's a little phrase in 53a-202 like "may be readily converted" into a firearm. i.e. an upper. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What authority did the police seize this property on? An AD/ND is just that. That can be prosecuted depending on specific or more general local laws. If someone gets hurt, then it is all on your hands. That is part of the responsibility of being a gun owner. This is an action that may cause you to lose your CCW permit pending a review with the state board. But if he is not a mental case or in danger of hurting his wife/gf, then there is no precedent for seizure! If no one is hurt, then you should be prosecuted for breaking whatever local "unsafe discharge" law there is and that is it! This is just sad. I'm not justifying this and I understand that it can easily kill you or others, but one AD/ND should not result in losing your 2nd amendment rights AND property rights immediately. If the police think you should not have your guns after the AD/ND, get a judge to sign for the seizure.
I never have had one, hopefully never will, and do everything to prevent it, but AD/ND DOES happen. I know people will jump down my throat for this, but seriously people, would you be o.k. giving up your guns all at once right after an AD/ND and the cops show up??? I think there would be a lot of "but I was only........I'm a different case because.............." type excuses coming out all of a sudden. And don't say "well it wouldn't happen to me" Because it can! I'm not arguing about their ability to take your guns in the event of an ND. I'm questioning their right to take thing that are not guns nor subject to control, like the upper in the OP. I mean, really, where does it end? There's a little phrase in 53a-202 like "may be readily converted" into a firearm. i.e. an upper. Right. "Readily converted into a firearm. Just add firearm." 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What authority did the police seize this property on? An AD/ND is just that. That can be prosecuted depending on specific or more general local laws. If someone gets hurt, then it is all on your hands. That is part of the responsibility of being a gun owner. This is an action that may cause you to lose your CCW permit pending a review with the state board. But if he is not a mental case or in danger of hurting his wife/gf, then there is no precedent for seizure! If no one is hurt, then you should be prosecuted for breaking whatever local "unsafe discharge" law there is and that is it! This is just sad. I'm not justifying this and I understand that it can easily kill you or others, but one AD/ND should not result in losing your 2nd amendment rights AND property rights immediately. If the police think you should not have your guns after the AD/ND, get a judge to sign for the seizure.
I never have had one, hopefully never will, and do everything to prevent it, but AD/ND DOES happen. I know people will jump down my throat for this, but seriously people, would you be o.k. giving up your guns all at once right after an AD/ND and the cops show up??? I think there would be a lot of "but I was only........I'm a different case because.............." type excuses coming out all of a sudden. And don't say "well it wouldn't happen to me" Because it can! I'm not arguing about their ability to take your guns in the event of an ND. I'm questioning their right to take thing that are not guns nor subject to control, like the upper in the OP. I mean, really, where does it end? There's a little phrase in 53a-202 like "may be readily converted" into a firearm. i.e. an upper. Without a lower, how can an upper be "readily converted" into a firearm? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What authority did the police seize this property on? An AD/ND is just that. That can be prosecuted depending on specific or more general local laws. If someone gets hurt, then it is all on your hands. That is part of the responsibility of being a gun owner. This is an action that may cause you to lose your CCW permit pending a review with the state board. But if he is not a mental case or in danger of hurting his wife/gf, then there is no precedent for seizure! If no one is hurt, then you should be prosecuted for breaking whatever local "unsafe discharge" law there is and that is it! This is just sad. I'm not justifying this and I understand that it can easily kill you or others, but one AD/ND should not result in losing your 2nd amendment rights AND property rights immediately. If the police think you should not have your guns after the AD/ND, get a judge to sign for the seizure.
I never have had one, hopefully never will, and do everything to prevent it, but AD/ND DOES happen. I know people will jump down my throat for this, but seriously people, would you be o.k. giving up your guns all at once right after an AD/ND and the cops show up??? I think there would be a lot of "but I was only........I'm a different case because.............." type excuses coming out all of a sudden. And don't say "well it wouldn't happen to me" Because it can! I'm not arguing about their ability to take your guns in the event of an ND. I'm questioning their right to take thing that are not guns nor subject to control, like the upper in the OP. I mean, really, where does it end? There's a little phrase in 53a-202 like "may be readily converted" into a firearm. i.e. an upper. Without a lower, how can an upper be "readily converted" into a firearm? Well, at the time I posted we did not know there was no lower in the house. |